Research Report on China's Use of Standards-Setting

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

March 15, 2012

PERIOD OF PROPOSAL SUBMISSION ENDS:

5:30 PM, April 6, 2012

The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission (hereafter “the Commission”) invites submission of proposals to provide a one-time unclassified report on standards-setting in China and its policy repercussions, if any, on domestic, foreign-invested and international firms.

ABOUT THE COMMISSION.  The Commission was established by Congress in 2000 to monitor and report to Congress on the economic and national security dimensions of the United States’ trade and economic ties with the PRC. Further details about the Commission are available on its website at: www.uscc.gov .

The Commission solicits this research pursuant to its Congressional mandate (contained in 22 U.S.C. 7002), which states that “The Commission… shall investigate and report exclusively on…

“ECONOMIC TRANSFERS.—The qualitative and quantitative nature of the transfer of United States production activities to the People’s Republic of China, including the relocation of high technology, manufacturing, and research and development facilities, the impact of such transfers on United States national security, the adequacy of United States export control laws, and the effect of such transfers on United States economic security and employment.

…

 “WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION COMPLIANCE.—The Commission shall review China’s record of compliance to date with its accession agreement to the WTO, and explore what incentives and policy initiatives should be pursued to promote further compliance by China.”

ABOUT PROPOSALS.  The Commission solicits proposals from contractors capable of providing a one-time unclassified report on standards-setting in China and its impact on international competition.

Key issues and questions to be addressed by the report are:

1. 
   
2. The Chinese government has developed and imposed standards in a number of product and service sectors (telecommunications, transportation, etc.).   Identify the potential impact of these policies and whether they are designed to spur “indigenous innovation,” and/or to advantage domestic Chinese manufacturers and service providers in their competition with foreign-invested enterprises or foreign companies operating outside of China.  Provide an overview and assessment – clearly supported by original references – of PRC policy to advantage preferred companies with this policy.
   
3. Provide analysis that contrasts PRC practices of using standards as a competitive tool, if any, with similar practices by other advanced industrial nations (the European Union, Japan, etc.).
   
4. Provide an overview and analysis of the PRC institutions responsible for standards-setting regulations. Provide as well an analysis of the practices of international standards-setting bodies (International Organization for Standardization, International Electrotechnical Commission, International Telecommunication Union, Universal Postal Union, etc.) as they compare to the practices of PRC standards-setting bodies.
   
5. Identify the extent to which industry organizations engage in cooperative standards- setting activities and whether their efforts are recognized by the PRC government.
   
6. Provide an overview of the fields of current technology (telecommunications, electronics, software, etc.) most affected by Chinese efforts to impose standards that would effectively exclude foreign competitors from the Chinese market. As applicable, provide illustrative case studies (at least 3-4) of affected products and technological sectors in which this scenario has played itself out.
   
   
7. Provide an overview of the fields of current technology (telecommunications, electronics, software, etc.) most affected by Chinese efforts to impose standards that secure access for Chinese producers in developing markets, from which other companies would then be effectively excluded. As applicable, provide illustrative case studies (at least 2-3) of affected products, technological sectors, and developing markets in which this scenario has played itself out.
   
   
8. Provide an overview of the service sectors (communications, financial services, transportation, etc.) most affected by Chinese efforts to impose technological standards, and/or other parallel regulations [infrastructure usage restrictions, health and safety regulations, capital requirements, management requirements (i.e., maintaining a Communist Party committee within the company), etc.] that would effectively exclude foreign competitors from the Chinese market. As applicable, provide illustrative case studies (at least 2-3) of affected sectors in which this scenario has played itself out.
   
9. Provide analysis and assessment as to the nature and background of companies most advantaged by PRC usage of standards as a competitive tool. Are the companies so advantaged Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs), or do private Chinese firms also benefit from these policies? Are there any identifiable cases in which the use of standards may have been used to protect SOEs from privately-owned Chinese competitors? Does the use of standards as a competitive tool appear to be used on a case-by-case basis, or are there indications that it is linked to a national-level industrial policy to promote particular industries or particular companies?
   
10. Discuss current efforts underway in international private and public sector organizations to address Chinese use of standards as a competitive tool, and assess these organizations’ future prospects for success.
    
11. Discuss current efforts underway within the U.S. government to identify Chinese standards-setting efforts and whether ongoing oversight is underway.   In addition, identify specific U.S. governmental efforts to address this issue, and identify any successful efforts that have occurred and assess the government’s future prospects for success. Also, provide an assessment of current U.S. policies regarding industrial standards that may either advantage or disadvantage U.S. producers and innovators; and as applicable, provide policy recommendations that could be considered by U.S. agencies seeking to ensure fair market access for U.S. companies.
    
12. Identify what major efforts, if any, have taken place by the governments of the European Union or Japan to identify and address Chinese standards-setting efforts.
    
13. Solicit input from business organizations (U.S. Chamber of Commerce, etc.) and other interested parties (consulting and/or law firms that deal in market access issues, etc.) regarding the impact on U.S. firms of PRC-imposed standards restrictions. Based on input from these stakeholders, to what extent have U.S. companies experienced market exclusion or other consequences as a result of such restrictions? Identify the extent to which, if any, that Chinese standards-settings efforts have changed as a result of bilateral dialogues and/or agreements between the United States and China.
    

Additional Requirements of the Commission:

1. 
   
2. Prior to the award of any contract, the contractor must be registered in the federal Central Contractor Registry (CCR).
   
   
3. Once a contractor has been selected for this project by the Commission and a contract signed, public notice of this will be made on the Commission’s website.
   
4. The Commission’s goal is to have a report prepared for review in a timely fashion.  In ordinary circumstances, once a contractor has been selected by the Commission and a contract signed, a draft of the report must be submitted to the Commission for review no later than 120 days from the date of contract confirmation. The Commission will then endeavor to provide comments and requests for adjustments within 30 days; subsequently, the final report must be submitted within 30 days of formal receipt of the Commission’s comments. The Commission recognizes that, under certain circumstances, a contractor may wish to have more time to prepare the first draft of the report under the contract.  The contractor, in their initial submission, should stipulate the time frame for submissions of the initial review draft.  It is to be understood, however, that time is of the essence in completing research contracts for the Commission.
   
5. As work on the report progresses, the Commission’s Research Coordinator shall act as a representative of the Commission in monitoring the progress, quality, and responsiveness of the report to the major issues of concern identified in the RFP. The Research Coordinator shall, on request to the contractor, be entitled to informal briefings on the status of the research work and to readings of the draft in progress.
   
6. The contract shall be subject to termination if the Commission deems that the work is of unsatisfactory quality.
   
7. At the Commission’s discretion, the report procured via this Request for Proposal may be posted on the Commission’s website.
   
8. Each organization or individual responding to this request must warrant that it/he/she will perform this work solely for the Commission, and that the resulting report will not be shared with other parties without the prior written consent of the Commission.
   
9. The Commission expects contractors to identify all personnel working on the contract, and that there will not be any delegation of responsibilities to other parties without prior written approval of the Commission.
   
10. After completion of the report, the Commission staff, in consultation with the Contractor, will prepare a short summary of the research for posting on the Commission’s web site and other media. The Commission staff shall consult with the contractor in preparing said document.
    
11. At the discretion of the Commission, the contractor will be expected to participate in activities relating to the dissemination of a final report. This could include, but not necessarily be limited to, briefing the content of the research to Commissioners and Commission staff, appearance as witnesses before hearings held by the Commission, and briefing the contents of the research to staff members of committees of the U.S. Congress. Briefing requests will be reasonable and will be subject to mutual agreement.
    

Primary Selection Criteria:

1. 
   
2. The Commission will determine which organization or individual responding to this request will be awarded the contract based on a comprehensive “best value” analysis of the proposals received, to include costs, technical value, and ability to complete the work satisfactorily and on time.
   
   
3. The primary weighting criterion in selection shall be the assessed qualifications and ability of an organization or individual to address the fundamental research points enunciated above (“key issues and questions to be addressed by the report”).
   
4. The Commission’s goal is to maximize the number of sectors that will be examined in the Contractor’s report.   As identified below, the Commission is seeking an identification of sectors the Contractor intends to cover and the cost of preparing a comprehensive report, or, in the alternative, on individual sectors.   The Commission may choose to contract with one Contractor for a comprehensive report or for a report covering one or more sectors identified in the Contractor’s submission.
   
   
5. The cost and amount of time necessary to complete the report will also be considered as criteria in the selection process.
   

Proposal submissions should include:

1.      A statement of the applicant’s relevant qualifications to satisfy the terms of this request for proposals (RFP), to include curricula vitae for personnel intended for work on the project.

2.    Identification of the principal researchers who will be responsible for the preparation of the report.   It is understood that the designation of the researchers is a critical element of the proposal, and any changes regarding which individuals will be involved in the report’s preparation must be approved by the Commission in advance and in writing.

3.     A description of the research methodology the applicant proposes to employ.  In describing methodology, the submission should provide detailed descriptions of the sources and methods that will be used to research the report’s topic and the extent to which Chinese language sources, if any, and other primary materials will be used.

4.   An estimate of the time the applicant will need to complete the required work.

5.     The price the applicant will charge to the Commission to complete the work set forth in this RFP.    The applicant should provide an identification of the sectors they intend to cover in their report and, if the applicant desires, a itemization of the price they will charge for covering each of those sectors.

Firms and individuals wishing to submit a proposal in response to this Request for Proposals must ensure that the response arrives at the following location by 5:30 PM on April 6, 2012 or it will not be accepted or considered. 

Electronic submissions are acceptable.

Proposals, as well as inquiries or any other correspondence related to this matter, should be directed to: 

John Dotson

Research Coordinator

U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission

Hall of the States, Suite 602

444 North Capitol Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20001

phone:  202-624-1482

e-mail: jdotson@uscc.gov